Memory task comparison

Working Memory Games Explained

Memory tasks differ in material, order, presentation, response, and scoring. Choose the mechanism you want to experience instead of treating every level as the same kind of memory capacity.

Category

Memory task comparison

Published

Aug 14, 2026

Updated

Aug 14, 2026

Author

focus-game.org editorial team

In these browser tasks, working memory is an operational description: information is presented, must remain available briefly, and is then reproduced or compared while the task continues. The page can score that behavior. It cannot reveal a complete memory system or convert performance into IQ.

The most important distinction is what must be retained. Digits, grid positions, colors, simultaneous locations, and continuous n-back matches impose different rules. Their levels and percentages have different denominators and cannot be added into a general memory score.

Span Tasks Increase the Amount of Material

A span-style task presents a list and asks for reproduction after presentation ends. Number Memory grows a digit string and requires typed recall in order. The achieved digit length belongs to that presentation rate, grouping opportunity, input method, and progression rule; it is not a universal memory age or standardized digit-span score.

Chunking can change performance without changing the displayed length. A familiar number pattern may be encoded as fewer meaningful groups than an unfamiliar one. Random generation reduces some predictability but does not remove strategy or practice effects.

Sequence Recall Requires Items and Order

Working Memory Test reveals grid positions one at a time and expects the same order. Memory Sequence uses a small set of colors that can repeat. In both, selecting the right items in the wrong order is an error because serial position is part of the rule.

A level may increase after success and fall or reset after an error. That staircase is a page policy, not a natural unit shared by every sequence task. Compare level only with the same cue timing, board, progression rule, and response method.

Simultaneous Visual Memory Does Not Require Serial Order

Visual Memory briefly marks several locations together, hides them, and accepts the target locations in any response order. The outcome concerns a set of positions rather than a presented sequence. Added non-target positions and omitted target positions should remain separate because they reflect different response mistakes.

Board dimensions, cell size, exposure duration, and whether the user changes zoom affect the task. A level from this page should not be compared numerically with a digit length or color sequence length.

N-Back Is Continuous Comparison, Not End-of-List Recall

At each step of an n-back task, the current item is compared with the item exactly n positions earlier. The site's Dual N-Back uses separate visual-position and letter channels. A position match and a letter match can occur independently, so the user maintains two response rules while the stream continues.

Hits are correctly reported matches, misses are matches not reported, and false alarms are reported matches that did not exist. Accuracy without those counts can conceal a response strategy. The n-level changes comparison distance and cannot be read as a number of ordinary items remembered.

Why the Scores Use Different Denominators

A span page may report the last completed length. A sequence page may report a level and strict full-sequence success. Visual Memory can score target locations against omissions and additions. N-back accuracy depends on match opportunities across channels. Even when two pages show a percentage, the counted events differ.

Keep raw counts where available and read the scoring explanation before interpreting progress. Never average levels from different tasks. If a combined number has no defined rule, denominator, and validation, it is decoration rather than a meaningful measurement.

Practice Gains and Broad Transfer Are Separate Questions

Repeated sessions teach cue locations, response mappings, timing, grouping, and recovery after mistakes. Improvement on the practiced task can be genuine while remaining specific to that task. Demonstrating transfer requires untrained outcomes and suitable control conditions, not only a rising local history.

Published reviews of working-memory and n-back training have found that trained-task or near-task gains do not justify confident claims about intelligence or broad real-world abilities. This site therefore reports page behavior and does not promise that Dual N-Back raises IQ.

Choose by Material and Response Rule

Choose Number Memory for typed digit strings, Memory Sequence for repeating color order, Working Memory for ordered grid locations, Visual Memory for an unordered location set, and Dual N-Back for continuous comparison across visual and letter channels. Pick one mechanism rather than stacking every task.

For personal comparison, preserve cue timing, difficulty, device, viewport, input, and progression settings. Stop when the planned block ends. A longer session is not automatically more informative, particularly when fatigue or loss of interest changes the response strategy.

FAQ

These questions stay tied to the visible content on this page.

No. This site's Visual Memory uses a simultaneous unordered set; sequence tasks require serial order.

Sources and further reading

Use these links to check the research context, measurement limits, and original definitions discussed above.

  1. Age differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information

    Journal of Experimental Psychology / PubMed — Kirchner's 1958 paper describing the task lineage behind n-back comparisons.

  2. Working memory training does not improve intelligence or other far-transfer measures

    Perspectives on Psychological Science / PubMed — A meta-analytic review separating trained-task gains from broader transfer claims.

  3. Working memory training revisited: a multi-level meta-analysis of n-back training

    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review / PubMed — Reports that much observed transfer was task-specific, with very small effects for other domains.

Related tools

Continue with tools that pair naturally with this page.

Related articles

Read supporting explainers and practical guides.